WPC4 2BJ  Courier3|wXw PE37XPCG Timeset 4_230_1HPLAS4.PRS 4x  @\_)^X@26 F J ZT3|o>HP LaserJet 4_230_1HPLAS4.PRS 4XR  P7jQ\_)^XP2vpVkk1a8DocumentgDocument Style StyleXX` `  ` a4DocumentgDocument Style Style . a6DocumentgDocument Style Style GX  a5DocumentgDocument Style Style }X(# 2vst]a2DocumentgDocument Style Style<o   ?  A.  a7DocumentgDocument Style StyleyXX` ` (#` BibliogrphyBibliography:X (# a1Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:`S@ I.  X(# 2 )  s a2Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers C @` A. ` ` (#` a3DocumentgDocument Style Style B b  ?  1.  a3Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers L! ` ` @P 1. ` `  (# a4Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers Uj` `  @ a. ` (# 26    ] a5Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers _o` `  @h(1)  hh#(#h a6Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbersh` `  hh#@$(a) hh#((# a7Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumberspfJ` `  hh#(@*i) (h-(# a8Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersyW"3!` `  hh#(-@p/a) -pp2(#p 2Fh h 8Tech InitInitialize Technical Style. k I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 Technicala1DocumentgDocument Style Style\s0  zN8F I. ׃  a5TechnicalTechnical Document Style)WD (1) . a6TechnicalTechnical Document Style)D (a) . 25x&sa2TechnicalTechnical Document Style<6  ?  A.   a3TechnicalTechnical Document Style9Wg  2  1.   a4TechnicalTechnical Document Style8bv{ 2  a.   a1TechnicalTechnical Document StyleF!<  ?  I.   2g3sa7TechnicalTechnical Document Style(@D i) . a8TechnicalTechnical Document Style(D a) . Doc InitInitialize Document Stylez   0*0*0*  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) I. 1. A. a.(1)(a) i) a)DocumentgPleadingHeader for Numbered Pleading PaperE!n    X X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:=i9>:?~;@i<header=Ax 4 <D  #FxX  Pg9CXP# reference>;#FxX  Pg9CXP#itemizeX1?&V 8F ` hp xr#FxX  Pg9CXP#header2@I ` hp x`    #FxX  Pg9CXP# 2AA^3>BO?Cr@DRAheading 3AF` hp x #FxX  Pg9CXP# footer!B!!#d\  PCP#a2AgendaCa1AgendaAgenda ItemsD7D yP ) I. 2PGErBBXD0 Ga3AgendaECG TimesCG Times Bold^2CRddCCCdq2C28dddddddddd88qqqYzoCNzoozzC8C^dCYdYdYCdd88d8ddddCN8ddddY`(`lC2CC!CCCCCCCCCCd8YYYYYYzYzYzYzYC8C8C8C8ddddddddddYdddddodYYYYYYdzYzYzYzYdddddddCdCdCCCdNCdz8zCzCzCz8dddddCCCoNoNoNoNzCzCzCdddddzYzYNF2[dCYddddd7>d<d<$YYdCCddooCYd<d<+oodCCddddCotbttYtkYbttttb5,5KP5GPGPG5PP,,P,|PPPP5>,PPtPPGM MW5(555555555555P,tGtGtGtGtGkkGbGbGbGbG5,5,5,5,tPtPtPtPtPtPtPtPtPtPtGtPtPtPtPtPYPtGtGkGkGkGkGtPbGbGbGbGtPtPtPtPtPtPtP5P5P555P>5tPb,b5b5b5b,tPtPtPtPtPtk5k5k5Y>Y>Y>Y>b5b5b5tPtPtPtPttPbGbGN8(HP5GPPPPP,2xxP0zzPx0GGP55PPYY5G0tZZXXZZ``(@Z,rO(B{r{{{iX1btXnXPttXn8wC;,Xw PE37XPD7zC;, c!Xz_ pi7XANE,ܼ PE37PD@NE, "#_ pi7x/c81,Apc PE37PWP}WP{.PF2lLegalMonarch7721 a5Right ParRight-Aligned graph Numbers _o` `  tY7oC2o\  PCXP7tC2 t4  p(ACX@N:3p\  PCP@N: 'p4  p(ACy.]8*]\  PCP4W!C(MAC\  PChPt,Y5(yY\  PCP7oC2o\  PCXP<55nC2n*f9 xCXX2 H\3 H\4 H\5 H\6 H\7 H\82>rf r[5Bf f,F",tB^ f ^;C]ddCCCdCCCCddddddddddCCY~~vCN~sk~CCCddCYdYdYCdd88d8ddddJN8ddddYYdYd4dddddCddddddddd8YYYYYY~Y~Y~Y~YC8C8C8C8ddddddddddYdddddsdXdXXXddx|X~d~d|XdddddddC8ddddCdoddd|8|H~d<|8dtddddHHdlLlLlLkd|H|8~ddddddddXXXd~ddkd~ddxCddCCCWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNdddCYQQddddddFddddFCChhd44ddzzdddvooChdF"dhd9dCCzCddoddCdYds]zUvdYYCCCCz~ozoY~NYdYC8YooYdYzsdzdd~YYzozzz~CdzYzzzzCCdddddddzCsdYC\   pxtll\tll@\@\`L",tB^ f ^;C]ddCCCdCCCCddddddddddCCdxN`xoCCCddCdoYoYFdo8Co8odooYNCodddYdddd4dddddCddddddddo8dddddYYYYYN8N8N8N8oddddooooddpddddxodddXXddXddXdddddooL8doddNorddo8PdN8ppoddXXdpLoNpLodPDdopoopodXYXodoodddCddCCCWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNdddCdUUddddddFddddFCCssd44ddzzddd~ooCsdF"dsd9dCCzCddoddCdYds`zUvdddCCCCzozoYNYYYN8YooYdYzzdzddYYzozzzNdzYzzzzCCdddddddzCzdYC\   pxtll\tll@\@\`L2f prf }<W",tB^ f ^ENluuNNNuNNNNuuuuuuuuuuNNhN[}NNNuuNhuhuhNuuAAuAuuuuV[Auuuuhhuhu=uuuuuNuuuuuuuuuAhhhhhhhhhhNANANANAuuuuuuuuuuhuuuuuuguggguuguuguuuuuuuNAuuuuNuuuuATuFAuuuuuTTu~Y~Y~Y}uTAuuuuuuuuggguuu}uuuNuuNNNWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNuuuNh__uuuuuuRuuuuRNNyyu<<uuuuuNyuR"uyuCuNNNuuuuNuhulcuhhNNNNh[huhNAhhuhuuuhhNuhNNuuuuuuuNuhN /;k  PP9~~+k~~KkKk&&pY",tB^ f ^ENluuNNNuNNNNuuuuuuuuuuNNu[pNNNuuNuhhRuANAuh[Nuuuhuuuu=uuuuuNuuuuuuuuAuuuuuhhhhh[A[A[A[AuuuuuuuuuuuuugguuguuguuuuuYAuuu[uuA]u[AuugguY[Yu]OuughguuuuNuuNNNWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNuuuNuccuuuuuuRuuuuRNNu<<uuuuuNuR"uuCuNNNuuuuNuhupcuuuNNNNh[hhh[Ahhuhuuuhh[uhNNuuuuuuuNuhN /;k  PP9~~+k~~KkKk&&pY"i~'K2^18MSS888S8888SSSSSSSSSS88Jxir{icx{8Aui{x`xoYi{xxxl888SS8JSJSJ8SS..S.SSSS>A.SSxSSJJSJS+SSSSS8SSSSSSSSS.xJxJxJxJxJorJiJiJiJiJ8.8.8.8.{SxSxSxSxS{S{S{S{SxSxJ{SxSxSxS{S`SxIxSxIqIqIrSrS{dgIiSiSgIxSxSxSxSxS{S{S8.SSSS8Sz]SSuSg/g!KM XI$-ԍ SWB comments at 16.> Use of these bands for wireless local loop service is supported by Bell Atlantic, NYNEX, OPASTCO, Rochester Telephone, SR Telecom, TDS Telecommunications, the"4!0*((f"  X-United States Telephone Association, and Tadiran Telecommunications.3"v Xy-ԍ Comments of Bell Atlantic at 23; NYNEX at 13; OPASTC at 23; Rochester Telephone at 12; SR Telecom at 25; TDS Telecommunications at 16; United States Telephone Association at 12 and; Tadiran Telecommunications at 2. Tadiran would also allocate the 24022417 MHz band for wireless local loops and would require that spread  X-spectrum equipment be used. See also Reply Comments of Frontier Corporation, GTE, Interdigital Corporation, and the National Telephone Cooperative Association.3 These commenters claim that the 23002310 MHz and 23902400 MHz bands present an ideal and unique opportunity to implement wireless local loops because they can be paired to provide frequency division duplex operation, which is advantageous for wireless local loops because it would allow a system to serve twice the number of users per port transceiver compared to a  X-system using time division duplex.S# XD -ԍ See Comments of SWB at Appendix A.S These commenters also state that these bands offer preferable propagation characteristics compared to spectrum above 3 GHz. These commenters also contend that it is not possible to provide wireless local loop service using spectrum allocated for Personal Communications Services (PCS) or the Basic Exchange Telecommunications Radio Service (BETRS) because of restrictions on use of those services. AvantGarde claims that it currently provides a wireless local loop type service in the 38 GHz band, and that the benefits espoused by SWB as to the cost and reliability benefits of wireless  X -local loops are indeed realistic.D$  XT-ԍ AvantGarde comments at 2.D Several commenters oppose allocating this spectrum for the  X -use of wireless local loops because, they claim, it would not be a new service.5% h  X-ԍ InFlight comments at 2021, Apple comments at 8. Apple states that our Rules already adequately provide for this type of service. InFlight claims that Section 7 of the Communications Act requires the Commission to prefer a new service over other types of service.5  X -x 12. Leaco Rural Telephone Cooperative (Leaco) states that the spectrum from the Federal Government should be used to provide interactive video, voice and data service in  Xy-rural areas.A&y X-ԍ Comments of Leaco at 1.A Pacific Bell Mobile supports a Fixed and Mobile allocation for the 23902400 MHz band and requests that we clarify that this band could be used as a source of additional  XK-PCS spectrum.Q'K X#-ԍ Comments of Pacific Bell Mobile at 13.Q  X-x 13. The Loral/Qualcomm Partnership, L.P. (Loral Qualcomm) requests that the 23902400 MHz band be allocated for use by nonGeostationary (nonGSO) Mobile Satellite Service (MSS) Earthtospace service links. Loral/Qualcomm states that the spectrum" 6'0*((" currently allocated for MSS is insufficient to support the likely demand for MSS and that  X-additional spectrum will soon be needed.I( Xb-ԍ Loral/Qualcomm comments at 24.I COMSAT Corporation (COMSAT) supports use  X-of this band for MSS service uplinks.E)y X-ԍ COMSAT reply comments at 5.E We note, however, that in comments filed in response  X-to the NOI in this proceeding, the American Mobile Satellite Corporation (AMSC) claimed that neither the 23902400 MHz nor the 24022417 MHz band was a viable candidate for providing MSS uplinks because of interference from ISM devices and Part 15 equipment  Xv-operating in the 24002500MHz band.^*v* XQ -ԍ AMSC comments filed in response to NOI at 12.^ In reply comments to the NPRM, AMSC supports instead use of both the 23902400 MHz and the 24022417 MHz bands for MSS service  XH-downlinks.+_H X-ԍ AMSC comments at 12. Such an allocation would conflict with the Preliminary Report's recommendation, which is supported by commenters in this proceeding, that the 23902400 MHz band not be used for spacetoEarth links. Preliminary Report, Section 4 at 1417, comments of the National Research Council (NRC) at 57, comments of Cornell University and The National Astronomy and Ionosphere Center (Cornell) at 23, and  Xa-comments filed in response to the NOI by Cornell University and NRC. AMSC argues, however, that these parties have not provided sufficient technical support for their position.  X -x 14. In our NPRM we raised the possibility of using either or both of the 23002310MHz and 23902400 MHz bands to provide unlicensed PCS or to accommodate the Multipoint Distribution Service (MDS) that is currently provided in the 21502160 MHz band  X -so that 21502160 MHz could be used for unlicensed PCS.S,   X-ԍ NPRM, 9 FCC Rcd. at 6781, para. 14.S Apple Computer, Compaq Computer, Standard Microsystems, Software Publishers Association (SPA), and Symbol Technologies, Inc., support allocating the 23902400 MHz band for unlicensed DataPCS (asynchronous PCS), citing the need for clear spectrum nationwide for implementation of  Xy-nomadic devices that can be used anywhere at anytime.-y X-ԍ Comments of Apple at 35; Compaq at 28; Standard Microsystems at 3 and; SPA at 68, reply comments of Symbol at 68. Microsoft and IEEE support  Xb-allocating 23902400 MHz for unlicensed use, but do not specify unlicensed DataPCS.V.bM X`#-ԍ Comments of Microsoft at 56, and IEEE at 4.V Several wireless cable service providers have filed comments opposing relocating MDS from the 21502160 MHz band, stating that this service is still in its infancy and faces strong competition from cable companies, satellite broadcast services, and even telephone companies" .0*((G" that will provide video dial tone service. They argue that any disruption of service could be  X-devastating to the industry and will be very expensive to implement./ Xb-ԍ Comments of Wireless Cable Association at 5; Wireless Holdings at 15 and; Home Box Office at 25.  X-x15. Decision. In the Second Report and Order in Gen Docket 90314, concerning establishment of PCS, we determined that successful implementation of unlicensed PCS devices requires 40 megahertz of spectrum. Accordingly, we dedicated the band 18901930 MHz for use by unlicensed PCS devices, with 20 megahertz of spectrum each for  X_-asynchronous and isochronous operation.0_b Xr -ԍ Amendment of the Commission's Rules to Establish New Personal Communications  X[ -Services, Second Report and Order, Gen Docket No. 90314, 8 FCC Rcd 7700, 7777, para. 185 (1993). Subsequently, in response to a number of petitions  XH-for reconsideration, we adopted a Memorandum Opinion and Order that modified the overall 2 GHz PCS allocation to better achieve our goals in developing the service. In doing so, however, we reduced the amount of spectrum dedicated for use by unlicensed PCS devices from 40 megahertz to 20 megahertz. We recognized that this would likely leave unlicensed PCS devices with insufficient spectrum to accommodate expected demand and indicated a  X -commitment to pursue additional spectrum for such use.1  Xk-ԍ Amendment of the Commission's Rules to Establish New Personal Communications  XT-Services, Memorandum Opinion and Order, Gen Docket No. 90314, 9 FCC Rcd 4957, 4991, para. 87 (1994).  X -x16. Considering the important contribution that we believe PCS will make in providing affordable, accessible communications for the public, we are committed to ensuring the successful implementation of such services. An important part of PCS will be the use of unlicensed devices to provide a wide variety of voice and data communications, particularly to interact with a larger information network. These devices have the potential to offer a portable "onramp" to the information highway that will be accessible to everyone. The potential for open access to the information infrastructure offered by unlicensed PCS devices will provide benefits, not only to commercial users, but also to individuals and private users. Accordingly, we believe that it is appropriate to fulfill our commitment to provide sufficient spectrum for unlicensed PCS data devices by allocating 23902400 MHz for use by  X-unlicensed asynchronous PCS devices.2h  X"-ԍ Comments filed in support of allocating this spectrum for unlicensed PCS have all expressed the need for additional spectrum for asynchronous (data) use. We have received no comments requesting that 23902400 MHz be used for isochronous (voice and limited data) unlicensed PCS. We are not, however, making a determination at this time that there is not a need for additional spectrum for isochronous use. This band provides a unique opportunity to provide for these devices. As pointed out by several commenters, equipment manufacturers will need" 20*((R" to relocate existing fixed microwave users out of the 19101930 MHz band, which we previously dedicated for unlicensed PCS use, before that band can be widely used by unlicensed PCS devices, particularly nomadic devices. Our action today will provide spectrum for immediate implementation of unlicensed nomadic PCS data operations.  X-x17. We will regulate these unlicensed PCS devices in accordance with Part 15 of our Rules. Devices operating under Part 15 have generally proven to be effective in operating in shared environments with other services, including in frequency bands shared with the Amateur service. We recognize the value of maintaining adequate spectrum for the Amateur service and we believe that the generally robust nature of PCS devices will make it feasible for unlicensed PCS devices and Amateur operations to operate on a shared basis in this band.  X -In addition, both Apple and the ARRL believe that shared use of this band is possible.Z3_  X| -ԍ Apple comments at 45 and 10, ARRL Ex Parte presentation dated January 26, 1995. Compaq argues that 23902400 MHz should be allocated for exclusive use by unlicensed PCS and that doing so will not excessively disrupt Amateur service operations. Compaq comments at 4. Compaq does not, however, provide details as to the potential for the Amateur service to adversely impact unlicensed PCS operations. Absent compelling information to the contrary, we believe that it is appropriate to provide continued access to the band by the Amateur service.Z Accordingly, we are providing for the continued availability of the 23902400 MHz band for Amateur operations, and are increasing the status of the Amateur service in this band to  X -primary.4  X^-ԍ While our decision today upgrades availability of the 23902400 MHz and 24022417MHz bands for the Amateur service from secondary to primary, we are not making a determination at this time as to the continued availability of the 23002310 MHz band for the Amateur service. We intend to carefully consider the benefits of continued Amateur service  X-access to 23002310 MHz in future decisions. In its January 26, 1995, Ex Parte presentation, ARRL requests that the Amateur service be given primary status in the entire 23902450 MHz band. The 24002402 MHz and 24172450 MHz portions of this band remain allocated for primary use by Federal Government stations and have not been identified for transfer to nonGovernment use. ARRL's request is, therefore, outside of the scope of this proceeding. We note, however, that the justification provided in the Department of Commerce Preliminary Report for not reallocating the 24002402 MHz portion was due to its current use by the  Xa -Amateur service and we expect that such use will continue to be accommodated. See Department of Commerce Preliminary Report at 417. Considering past experience of Part 15 devices and Amateur service users operating in a shared environment, we do not believe that it is necessary to adopt specific provisions for protecting either of these operations.  Xb-x18. While we have considered allocating this band for Fixed and Mobile services or for a number of specific services proposed by commenters in this proceeding such as, AAVS, wireless local loops, and MSS, we believe that use by new unlicensed PCS and continued use"4 40*((" by the Amateur service represents the greatest opportunity for using this band to benefit the public. We believe that allocation of this band for unlicensed PCS will lead to the development of new and unique devices and applications that can be provided in a cost  X-effective manner and will be available to virtually every person in the nation.5H X4-ԍ Our decision should not be interpreted as a general policy statement regarding the relative merits of these various uses. It is merely reflects our belief that, for reasons limited to this band and the communications environment at this time, the public will receive the greatest benefit from use of this band for unlicensed PCS. We also note that we have  X-initiated a proceeding to pursue additional spectrum for MSS. See Amendment of Section 2.106 of the Commission's Rules to Allocate Spectrum at 2 GHz for Use by the Mobile X -Satellite Service, Notice of Proposed Rule Making ET Docket No. 9518, FCC 9539, released January 31, 1995. Such devices will increase American productivity by allowing business to operate more efficiently and will allow more people to access information in a variety of ways from almost any location. Amateur service use of this band will allow these users to continue to develop radio communication technologies through experimentation, provide communications during emergencies and natural disasters, and provide education in the area of radio communication.  X -x19. There are a number of additional reasons for using 23902400 MHz for unlicensed PCS as opposed to other proposed services. Concerning our proposal to allocate this band for Fixed and Mobile services, we believe that the recent allocation of 120 megahertz of spectrum at 2GHz for general mobile services in the form of broadband PCS is sufficient to satisfy the needs of general mobile service providers in this frequency range at this time. Moreover, an allocation for Fixed and Mobile use would be incompatible with continued use of this band by the Amateur service.  Xb-x20. The wireless local loop service proposed by Southwestern Bell is also incompatible with continued use of this band by the Amateur service. Although Southwestern Bell has addressed this concern, the solutions proposed would either result in a significant decrease in the amount of spectrum available to the Amateur service or would require allocation of alternate spectrum for the Amateur service. Further, we believe that wireless local loop service could be provided in spectrum allocated for broadband PCS in the 18501990 MHz band. Although our rules specify that Fixed services provided under PCS must be  X-ancillary to mobile operations,>6 XJ!-ԍ 47 C.F.R.  24.3.> we have attempted to provide licensees with flexibility to determine how this spectrum is used and we would entertain waiver requests to provide primary Fixed service in this spectrum for certain applications if a licensee demonstrates that  X|-a Fixed service best meets the demands of an area.7|  X%-ԍ As we stated in determining what services could be provided under PCS, fixed  X&-services can generally be accommodated in other bands. Second Report and Order, Gen Docket 90314, 8 FCC Rcd 7700, 7712, para. 23 (1993). A recent staff letter clarifying"'60*(('" permissible uses of PCS spectrum, notes that the Commission intended the definition of PCS to be sufficiently inclusive to accommodate a wide range of services and technologies, including new and creative applications. Letter to A. Carroccio from R. Keeney, Chief, Wireless Telecommunications Task Force, Nov. 15, 1994, at 1.  We also note that a number of"| 470*((" proponents of the wireless local loop service have stressed the need for such service in rural areas. It seems likely that, in these rural areas, broadband PCS systems will have sufficient capacity to accommodate wireless local loops. This service could be provided either directly by the broadband PCS licensee or through a secondary provider operating under the licensee's  X-authority.l84 X -ԍ In addition, our Rules allow a PCS licensee to assign portions of its licensed PCS spectrum after January 1, 2000, provided it has met the fiveyear construction requirements. 47 C.F.R. 24.229(d). Geographic partitioning to rural telephone companies is also permitted under Section 24.714 of the Commission's Rules.l  Xv-x21. Regarding proposed use of 23902400 MHz for provision of an aeronautical audio/visual service (AAVS), we note that this service would be limited to airline passengers, rather than the general public. We believe that other spectrum or other alternative possibilities should be considered for such a service. For example, InFlight has stated that  X -AAVS could be accommodated in the 46604685 MHz band,q9  Xk-ԍ See InFlight Ex Parte filing dated January 24, 1995.q and, if an AAVS provider is able to obtain a nationwide license, AAVS can be provided as a Mobile service in that band. Finally, concerning possible use of this band for MSS, the Commission is currently considering allocation of an additional 70 megahertz of spectrum in the 2 GHz band and we  X -believe this may be sufficient to satisfy MSS needs in this frequency range at this time.: Q  X-ԍ See Notice of Proposed Rule Making, ET Docket No. 9518, FCC 9539, released January 31, 1995.  X-x22. As discussed above, we received comments from a number of entities seeking use of this spectrum to satisfy the needs of private spectrum users, particularly as described in the Petition for Rule Making filed by COPE. Although we have not allocated this spectrum for private use, we believe that the types of uses provided by unlicensed PCS devices, as well as unlicensed devices operating under Part 15 of our Rules in the 24002483.5 MHz band, will meet some of the requirements described by COPE as they relate to data and information  X-transfer.;  X#-ԍ In addition, additional capacity for private systems may be gained through  X$-implementation of spectrum efficient technologies. See Replacement of Part 90 by Part 88 to  Xt%-Revise the Private Land Mobile Radio Services and Modify the Policies Governing Them,  X]&-Notice of Proposed Rule Making, PR Docket No. 92235, 7 FCC Rcd 8105 (1992).  In addition, we have released a report evaluating the needs of the public safety"W;0*((" community through the year 2010 and we will consider the recommendations in this report as  X-additional spectrum becomes available.< Xb-ԍ See Federal Communications Commission, Report and Plan: Meeting State and  XK-Local Government Public Safety Needs Through the Year 2010, FCC 9555, released Feb. 9, 1995.  X-x23. We will regulate unlicensed PCS devices in accordance with the technical standards currently embodied in Part 15, Subpart D of the Rules. Because we already have existing rules for unlicensed PCS in place, we believe that it is appropriate to apply them to devices that will use the 23902400 MHz band. Accordingly, the power levels, emission limits, and the spectrum etiquette for unlicensed PCS devices operating at 23902400 MHz shall be consistent with requirements for asynchronous devices operating at 19101920 MHz. Also consistent with use of the 19101920 MHz band, asynchronous devices operating in the 23902400 MHz band must have a bandwidth of 500 kHz or greater. Unlike the 19101930 MHz band, there are no incumbent users in the 23902400 MHz band that must be relocated prior to widespread use of the band for unlicensed PCS. Therefore, we will not require that  X -unlicensed PCS devices operating at 23902400 MHz be coordinated through UTAM.= K X-ԍ Prior to operation, unlicensed PCS devices at 19101930 MHz must be coordinated by the Unlicensed PCS Ad Hoc Committee for 2 GHz Microwave Transition Management  X-(UTAM). See 47 C.F.R.  15.307.  X -x24. We note that the Notice did not contain a specific discussion of technical rules for unlicensed PCS devices. However, we have concluded that an additional notice and comment period regarding rules for unlicensed PCS devices is unnecessary and would be contrary to the public interest. First, it is unnecessary because we already have rules in place governing the operation of unlicensed asynchronous PCS devices. Our action here merely provides additional spectrum for such use. Second, providing a notice and comment period would be contrary to the public interest because it would unnecessarily delay the availability of unlicensed PCS devices and the benefits that these devices will provide to the public. Accordingly, pursuant to Section 553 of the Administrative Procedures Act we find good cause for adopting these slight modifications to Part 15 of the Rules without notice and comment, 5 U.S.C.  553(b)(3)(B).  X|- 24022417 MHz   XN-x25. The 24022417MHz band is allocated internationally in Region 2 on a primary basis to the fixed, mobile, and radiolocation services, and on a secondary basis to the amateur  X -service.i>  X&-ԍ See Table of Frequency Allocations, 47 C.F.R.  2.106.i Domestically, the band is currently allocated on a secondary basis to the amateur service. The 24022417 MHz band lies within the 24002500 MHz band that is available for"  >0*((["  X-use by industrial, scientific, and medical (ISM) applications.? Xy-ԍ See Table of Frequency Allocations, 47 C.F.R.  2.106. See also 47 C.F.R. Part 18.Ğ Radio services operating within this band must accept harmful interference that may be caused by ISM devices, which include a large number of microwave ovens commonly used in households. In addition, the 24002483.5 MHz band is available domestically for use by equipment authorized under Part  X-15 of the Rules.j@y X-ԍ Part 15 provides for operation of unlicensed lowpower devices. j  Xv-x26. As described previously, the 24022417 MHz band lies within the Amateur service 13 cm band. Amateur comments regarding reallocation of portions of the 13 cm band  XH-have already been discussed in the preceding paragraphs,?AH* X# -ԍ Para. 8, supra.? and the points made with regard to reallocation of 23902400 MHz apply to this band as well.  X -x27. We received very few comments recommending uses for the 24022417 MHz band other than for the Amateur service or continued Part 15 use. In general, commenters argue that use of the band for ISM equipment severely limits the band's utility for provision of commercial services. Several ISM equipment manufacturers express concern that allocating 24022417 MHz for a licensed commercial service, especially if licenses are issued  X-via competitive bidding, could adversely affect ISM use of the band in the future.B X-ԍ Comments of Fusion Systems Corporation (FSC) at 4, Fusion Lighting, Inc. (FLI) at 12. Reply comments of SUNSAT Energy Council, International Space Power Program, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, and ETM Solar Works.  Xb-x28. Only a few commenters support commercial use of 24022417 MHz. Tadiran urges that Part 15 use of the band be phased out and that the band be made available for  X4-implementation of wireless local loop service using spread spectrum technology.CC4^  XC-ԍ Tadiran comments at 23. C Pegasus Communications, Inc. argues that the band should be used for a low power mobile service for  X-video production use.;D  X -ԍ Pegasus comments.;  X-x29. Loral/Qualcomm, supported by AMSC and COMSAT, seeks use of the band for nonGSO MSS service links in the spacetoEarth direction, stating its belief that Part 15 and  X-ISM use of the band will have minimal impact on MSS operations.E  X&-ԍ Loral/Qualcomm comments at 3, 45 AMSC reply comments at 23, and COMSAT reply comments at 5. AMSC believes that"ZE0*((" interference between MSS providers and other users of the band can be handled on a caseby X-case basis.CF Xb-ԍ AMSC reply comments at 3.C  X-x30. More than onethird of the comments received in response to the NPRM were filed by manufacturers of Part 15 devices, particularly manufacturers of wireless local area  X-networks (LANs) and devices that interact with wireless LANs. G y X-ԍ See generally Comments of 3Com Corporation (3Com), Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. (AMD), Andrew Corporation (Andrew), Apple Computer, Inc. (Apple), AT&T, Brian Robinson, Cincinnati Microwave, Compaq Computer Corporation (Compaq), Consumer Electronics Group of the Electronics Industries Association (EIA), Cylink Corporation (Cylink), IEEE 802, International Business Machines Corporation (IBM), Metricom, Inc., Microsoft Corporation (Microsoft), Norand Corporation (Norand), Part 15 Coalition, Rockwell International Corp. (Rockwell), Standard Microsystems Corporation (SMC), Symbol Technologies, Inc. (Symbol), Tetherless Access LTD. (TAL), Western Multiplex Corporation (WMC), Windata, Inc., Wireless Information Networks Forum, Inc. (Winforum), Xircom, Inc. and Reply Comments of AMD, Apple, AT&T, Claircom Communications Group, L.P, Compaq, Cylink, Interdigital Communication Corporation, IBM, Micron Communications, Inc., Part 15 Coalition, Metricom, Symbol, Andrew, Proxim, Inc.  These commenters note that, since the Commission encouraged development of unlicensed spread spectrum systems in the 902928 MHz, 24002483.5 MHz, and 57005825 MHz bands, the industry has responded with a wide variety of products, including digital cordless telephones, electronic article surveillance equipment, utility metering devices, fire and security alarm devices, wireless bar code readers, collision avoidance systems, and wireless LANs. They contend that these Part 15 devices provide the kind of spectrum efficient uses, new technologies, and open competitive markets that the Commission is trying to promote. The LAN MAN Standards Committee of the IEEE, IEEE 802, and other parties filed comments discussing the work that has gone into developing standards for wireless LANs based on current Part 15 Rules for this band. These commenters note that 24002483.5 MHz is increasingly available internationally for Part 15 type use and it is likely that the IEEE 802 standard will be used internationally. They argue, therefore, that it would undermine the nation's international competitiveness if the Commission adversely affects Part 15 use of the band. The commenters urge that the 24022417 MHz portion of the band be retained for Part 15 use without disruption by high power licensed systems. Some commenters argue that the status of Part 15 use should be raised to primary.  X-x31. Several parties seeking spectrum for private uses urge that 24022417 MHz be allocated for licensed use by private radio services, particularly for advanced private systems  X-as described by COPE.pH- X&-ԍ Comments of County of LA at 3, FIT at 6, ITA at 1112, and MRFAC at 8.p On the other hand, API, TIA, UTC, and Motorola, all entities that are generally strong proponents of allocating spectrum for private radio services, oppose"H0*((4" licensed use of 24022417 MHz, arguing instead that the band should remain available for use by Part 15 devices because of the broad utility of Part 15 equipment, including for private  X-users.tI XK-ԍ Comments of API at 78; TIA at 2 and 10; UTC at 14; and Motorola at 1014.t UTC urges the Commission to place spread spectrum Part 15 devices into a new Part  X-16 and accord these devices primary status in the band.=Jy X-ԍ UTC comments at 14.=  X-x32. Decision. Commenters expressed only limited interest in use of the 24022417 MHz band for licensed commercial services. In contrast, there was significant concern expressed about maintaining use of the band by Part 15 devices. As described above, this band lies within 24002483.5 MHz, which is available for use by spread spectrum devices under Part 15 of our Rules. Eliminating Part 15 use of 24022417 MHz would severely reduce the amount of spectrum available to Part 15 devices, and could significantly impair the ability of Part 15 devices to operate in the 24002483.5 MHz band by forcing them to operate entirely in portions of the band most affected by ISM devices and by limiting their information capacity. These Part 15 devices provide a variety of consumer and business oriented services that benefit individuals, commercial services, and private spectrum users, and they also have applications for public safety and medical needs. Benefits include lower costs of energy through automatic meter reading and optimized power generation, lowcost broadband access to Internet services and other information networks for schools, libraries, telecommuters and home offices, mobility of telephonic and computer communications within offices and homes without extensive reconstruction and wiring, immediately installable video conferencing among and between buildings for educational instruction, health care monitoring and judicial procedures without construction of special studio facilities, safe transport of chemicals and petroleum products through lowcost and easily deployable pipeline monitoring services, and control for potentially tens of thousands of traffic lights, at less than onethird the cost of wireline solutions, to ease road congestion, and significantly reduce pollution and  X-new street construction.VK* X-ԍ See, e.g., Cylink comments at 4.V These and other applications of technologies implemented through Part 15 devices have the potential to benefit virtually every person and business in the nation, as well as to promote American competitiveness abroad. Considering the universal benefits provided by part 15 equipment, the potential growth for new technologies in this area, and the difficulty of implementing commercial services in this band, we find that the public is best served by providing for the continued availability of this band for Part 15 equipment.  X -x 33. One of the principal Part 15 uses being implemented in the 24002483.5 MHz band is wireless LANs. Commenters have provided sales figures demonstrating a rapidly expanding market for wireless LAN equipment with sales of $200 million for 1994 and  X-expected sales as high as $2.5 billion dollars by 1998.^L Xg'-ԍ Comments of IBM at 11; Symbol at 5; and Norand at 6.^ Disrupting Part 15 use of 2402"L0*(("ԫ2417MHz could affect the market as well as the ability of U.S. firms to compete in the worldwide market for wireless LANs. In addition, manufacturers would have to modify equipment designed to operate throughout the 24002483.5 MHz band at a time when considerable resources have been expended on equipment development but when manufacturers have not yet recouped their investment because the equipment is just now becoming widely available.  X_-x!34. In addition to maintaining availability of 24022417 MHz for use by Part 15 equipment, we are also providing for continued use of this band by the Amateur service and upgrading the band from secondary to primary use by the Amateur service. Both Part 15 manufacturers and Amateur service licensees are familiar with operating in a shared radio environment, and we are unaware of any conflicts that have occurred between Part 15 devices and Amateur operations in this band. This action will essentially preserve the status quo  X -regarding use of this band.M  XN-ԍ Our action today does not affect use of this band by ISM equipment. ISM use of this frequency band will continue in accordance with Part 18 of our Rules, 47 C.F.R. Part 18. Other radio services operating in this band must accept harmful interference which may be  X -caused by ISM applications. See footnote 752 to the Table of Frequency Allocations, 47 C.F.R.  2.106.  X -x"35. We decline to allocate the band for other uses proposed by commenters. None of the parties that support use of this band for MSS support their belief that MSS is compatible with Part 15 or ISM use of the band. MSS is also not compatible with Amateur use of the band. In addition, we are currently considering allocation of an additional 70 megahertz of spectrum in the 2 GHz band that may be sufficient to satisfy MSS needs in this frequency  X4-range at this time.IN4 X-ԍ See note 53, supra.I Tadiran's proposal to use this band for wireless local loops is part of a larger proposal by Tadiran to allocate the 23002310 MHz, 23902400 MHz, and 24022417 MHz bands for spread spectrum wireless local loops that Tadiran states would meet the  X-technical requirements for spread spectrum systems under Part 15 of our Rules.BO Xn-ԍ Tadiran comments at 24.B However, we have made the 23902400 MHz band available for unlicensed PCS devices, and without that band Tadiran's plan would be incomplete. We believe that the public is benefitted more by allowing the greatest number of possible uses of this band under Part 15 of the Rules rather than by restricting use to one type of application. We note that Tadiran would be able to use this band for spread spectrum wireless local loops under Part 15 of our rules, although not on an exclusive basis. The proposal by Pegasus to use this band for video production use would result in relatively limited benefits to the public when compared to the amount and types use provided by Part 15 devices operating in this band. In addition, as we noted in our decision regarding the 23902400 MHz band, while we have not allocated this band for the"  O0*((z" exclusive use of private users, we believe that unlicensed devices operating under Part 15 of  X-our Rules will meet some of the needs of private users.JP Xb-ԍ See para. 22, supra.J  X- 46604685 MHz  Xv-x#36. Internationally, 46604685 MHz is allocated in Region 2 on a primary basis for  X_-fixed, fixedsatellite, and mobile services.Q_yj} X9 -ԍ See Table of Frequency Allocations, 47 C.F.R.  2.106. Use of the fixedsatellite service (spacetoearth) at 45004800 MHz is subject to an allotment plan contained at Appendix 30B of the international Radio Regulations. This band is allocated domestically on a primary basis for nongovernment fixedsatellite service spacetoEarth links, with use limited to  X1-international intercontinental systems.2R1 X-ԍ See Table of Frequency Allocations, 47 C.F.R.  2.106. The fixedsatellite service in  X-this band is also subject to casebycase electromagnetic compatibility analyses. See U.S.  X-allocation footnote 245.2 However, there is currently no nonGovernment use  X -of this band.KS    XJ-ԍ An agreement with Canada requires that certain United States Government terrestrial line of sight and troposcatter systems be coordinated with Canada. This agreement also permits use of this band by airborne or other mobile stations but requires that such stations  X-protect Canadian systems. See Sharing Arrangement Between the Department of Communications of Canada and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration of the United States Concerning the Use of the Band 44005000 MHz, signed August 29, 1986. Because this agreement was between the NTIA and the Canadian Department of Communications it will be necessary, in the future, to evaluate and renegotiate an agreement between the FCC and the Canadian Government for nonGovernment use of this band.K  X -x$37. The Association for Maximum Service Television, Inc. (MSTV) in a joint filing  X -with a number of television broadcast entities reasserts its request, discussed in the NPRM, that 46604685 MHz be allocated for use by the broadcast auxiliary service to support digital advanced television and possibly to relieve congestion in the 19902110 MHz band. MSTV claims that no other service has made a compelling argument for requiring use of the 46604685 MHz band and that implementation of advanced television will provide the greatest  Xb-benefit to the public.@Tba Xt%-ԍ MSTV comments at 210.@ This is also supported by the Society of Broadcast Engineers, Inc._Ub X%'-ԍ Reply comments of the Society of Broadcast Engineers._"bU0*((J"Ԍ X-ԙx%38. Other parties request that the band be allocated for private fixed microwave to accommodate systems being displaced from the 2 GHz PCS bands. They dispute our belief that adequate provision has been made to reaccommodate fixed microwave systems displaced  X-by PCS.WV X4-ԍ API comments at 89, Alcatel comments at 89.W These parties argue that additional spectrum for reaccommodation of displaced fixed microwave operations is needed. Alcatel claims that discrepancies between protection criteria for fixed microwave systems and fixedsatellite systems operating in the 37004200 MHz band limit the usefulness of that band for reaccommodation of fixed users displaced  X_-from the 2 GHz PCS band.BW_y X -ԍ Alcatel comments at 89.B As noted by Alcatel, however, accommodation of displaced fixed pointtopoint systems requires use of paired spectrum with sufficient frequency separation between pairs. Alcatel argues that at least 100 megahertz of spectrum is required to accommodate the necessary frequency pairs and urges the Department of Commerce to identify an additional 50 megahertz of spectrum in this frequency band for reallocation to  X -private sector use.X * X-ԍ Alcatel comments at 9. An additional 50 megahertz of spectrum, combined with the 46354660 MHz band that was also identified for reallocation in the Preliminary Report, would result in a total of 100 MHz.  X -x&39. Loral/Qualcomm advocates using this band for Earthtospace feeder links to support nonGSO MSS. Although this band is already allocated for Fixed Satellite Service (FSS) spacetoEarth links and is part of the FSS allotment plan in Appendix 30B of the international Radio Regulations, Loral/Qualcomm states that their proposal to implement reverse band working of this spectrum, without interfering with FSS operations, is supported  XK-by papers submitted to ITUR Working Party 4A and Task Group 4/5.IYK X-ԍ Loral/Qualcomm comments at 56.I  X-x'40. Several commenters suggest that this band be used to provide a variety of wireless interactive services. Proposals as to how this would be implemented vary. American Telecasting favors our proposal for a general allocation, with licenses awarded by auction, but it would have the Commission restrict eligibility to those entities already  X-providing service to paying subscribers within a market.OZ^  X!-ԍ American Telecasting comments at 46.O Leaco Rural Telephone Cooperative, Inc. also favors a general allocation but wants rural telephone exchange carriers  X-to have a preference for obtaining spectrum in certain areas.@[  XS%-ԍ Leaco comments at 59.@ Wireless Holding, Inc. and the Wireless Cable Association International both support our proposal for a very flexible"| [0*((P"  X-allocation and urge us to not adopt overly restrictive eligibility or technical rules.\ Xy-ԍ Comments of Wireless Holdings, Inc. at 45, and the Wireless Cable Association International at 17. Finally,  X-Tadiran proposes that 46604685 MHz be used for inbuilding communications.@]b X-ԍ Tadiran comments at 2.@  X-x(41. Decision. We are adopting a Fixed and Mobile allocation in the 46604685 MHz band. We have weighed the benefits of allocating this band for the services proposed by commenters, but remain convinced that the public will receive the greatest benefit by allocating the 46604685 MHz band to the Fixed and Mobile services, regardless of whether the ultimate use of this spectrum is for private services, nonsubscriber services, or subscriber based services .  X -x)42. A number of commenters argue that if we adopt such an allocation we would not fulfill our responsibility under Section 303 of the Communications Act which requires that we classify radio stations and prescribe the nature of the service to be rendered by each radio  X -station.^  X-ԍ See Comments of Continental Airlines at 2, FIT at 3, InFlight at 36, MRFAC at 4, Metricom at 1013, Motorola at 1517, TIA at 4, UTC at 3 and Winforum at 8. 47 U.S.C.  303(a), 303(b). As explained below, we believe that an allocation to Fixed and Mobile services is permissible under the Communications Act and, for the 46604685 MHz band, we find that a Fixed and Mobile allocation is in the public interest. Therefore, we reject the arguments advanced by commenters.  Xb-x*43. The Commission is required by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration Organization Act (NTIAO Act) to issue regulations to allocate the 50megahertz of spectrum that the Secretary of Commerce identified and recommended for immediate reallocation from Government use no later than 18 months from enactment of the  X-Reconciliation Act._ XM-ԍ Section 115(a) of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration Organization Act, 47 U.S.C.  925(a). For purposes of this portion of the NTIAO Act, the term "allocation" is defined as "an entry in the National Table of Frequency Allocations of a given frequency  X-band for the purpose of its use by one or more radiocommunication services" (emphasis  X-added).`0  X#-ԍ Section 111(1) of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration Organization Act, 47 U.S.C.  921(1) (emphasis added). The Table of Frequency Allocations often contains allocations to more than one  X-type of serviceIa  X%'-ԍ See 47 C.F.R.  2.106.I and such allocations are specifically authorized in this instance by the"{a0*((p" NTIAO Act. Therefore, our allocation of the 46604685 MHz band to Fixed and Mobile Services is permissible and consistent with established practice.  X-x+44. We believe that such an allocation is consistent with the Commission's obligations under the Communications Act. The Commission has very broad authority under the Communications Act to allocate spectrum. Our authority derives from Section 303 of the Communications Act, which provides: XxX` ` Except as otherwise provided in this Act, the Commission from time to time, as public convenience, interest, or necessity requires shall x` XxX` ` (a) Classify radio stations;x` XxX` ` (b) Prescribe the nature of the service to be rendered by each class of licensed stations and each station within any class;x` XxX` ` (c) Assign bands of frequencies to the various classes of stations,  Xb-and assign frequencies for each individual station ....Cbb X-ԍ 47 U.S.C.  303(a)(c)Cx` Nothing in the language of Section 303 establishes or suggests any limitation or restriction on the Commission's discretion to prescribe the nature of the service to be rendered over radio  X-frequencies or its authority to assign (or allocate) frequencies to the various classes of stations. Moreover, nothing in the language of Section 303 or its legislative history suggests that the Commission is prohibited from assigning spectrum to stations for more than one permissible use, or otherwise limits the Commission's discretion in making spectrum  X-allocations that it deems to serve the public interest.cHy X-ԍ Other sections of the Communications Act support the view that Congress expected  X-the Commission to utilize some amount of spectrum for particular types of services. See,  X-e.g., 47 U.S.C.  309(b) (referring to fixed pointtopoint microwave stations, industrial radio positioning stations, and aeronautical stations); 47 U.S.C.  319 (distinguishing between amateur stations, mobile stations, public coast stations, privately owned fixed microwave stations, common carrier stations, and broadcast stations). Nevertheless, these sections cannot be read to limit the Commission's discretion to permit the use of some spectrum for more broadly defined services. With respect to allocation decisions,  X-courts have accorded "substantial deference" to Commission determinations.Hd  X$-ԍ See National Ass'n of Regulatory Utility Commissioners v. FCC, 525 F.2d 630, 636  X%-(D.C. Cir.), cert. denied, 425 U.S. 992 (1976); see also Telocator Network of America v.  X&-FCC, 691 F.2d 525, 549 (D.C.Cir. 1982). H "| d0*(("Ԍ X-x,45. Commission precedent also supports the permissibility of allocating spectrum in a manner that allows for its use by a broadly defined service. In 1986, the Commission allocated 2 MHz of spectrum for a new General Purpose Mobile Service (GPMS) accessible  X-to all land mobile, maritime mobile, and aeronautical mobile uses.Ee X4-ԍ Amendment of Parts 2 and 22 of the Commission's Rules Relative to Cellular  X-Communications System, Report and Order, GEN Docket Nos. 841231, 841233, 841234, 2  X-FCC Rcd 1825, 1841 (1986), recon. denied, 2 FCC Rcd 6830 (1987).E In that instance, the  X-Commission found that its GPMS allocation served the public interest.<fK X -ԍ Id. at 1840.< The Commission rejected claims that such an allocation was unlawful, noting that "[n]othing in Sections 303(a)(c) suggests the Commission is not permitted to take into account marketplace forces  X_-when exercising its spectrum allocation responsibilities under the public interest standard."g_ X -ԍ Id. at 1839. We note that this flexible use spectrum was never licensed. We  X- ultimately reallocated this spectrum for narrowband personal communications services (PCS). Our current approach is also similar to that taken in our Emerging Technologies proceeding, ET Docket No. 929. In that proceeding, the Commission allocated 220 megahertz of spectrum to the Fixed and Mobile services and identified it for use by emerging technologies.  X -Later, we permitted PCS providers to use 140 megahertz of this spectrum.h  XJ-ԍ See generally Amendment of the Commission's Rules to Establish New Personal Communications Services, GEN Docket No. 90314, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 9 FCC Rcd 5031 (1994). We disagree with the contention made by some commenters that the current approach differs from that  X -applied in allocating spectrum for PCS.i   X-ԍ A broad variety of services are permitted under PCS. See Section 24.3 of the Rules which permit PCS licensees to, "provide any mobile communications service on their assigned spectrum. Fixed services may be provided only if ancillary to mobile operations. Broadcasting as defined by the Communications Act is prohibited." 47 C.F.R.  24.3. While we envision service rules designed to accommodate a variety of uses, as with PCS, we have no intention of abdicating our responsibility to provide a regulatory structure that is sufficient to provide for use of the spectrum that is in the public interest. The necessary extent of such a structure is explored in the Notice of Proposed Rule Making section of this item.  XK-x-46. Our allocation is also not so broad as to permit use of the 46604685 MHz band for any purpose. Allocation to the Fixed and Mobile services will allow licensees to use the spectrum to provide any Fixed service, including Aeronautical Fixed, fixed pointtopoint, and fixed pointtomultipoint systems, and any Mobile service, including Aeronautical mobile, Land mobile, or Maritime mobile service. The allocation would not, however, allow licensees"i0*((" to use the spectrum for Broadcast services, Radiolocation services, or any Satellite services,  X-including the Broadcast or Mobile Satellite Service.j Xb-ԍ We note that Broadcast Auxiliary services are not considered a Broadcasting service  XK-as defined in Section 2.1 of our Rules, 47 C.F.R.  2.1. See also para. 53, infra.  X-x.47. Although the majority of commenters oppose our proposal, we note that we did receive support for a Fixed and Mobile allocation. Wireless Holdings, Leaco Rural Telephone Cooperative (Leaco), American Telecasting, Pacific Bell Mobile Systems, and the Wireless Cable Association (WCA) support a fixed and mobile allocation for some or all of the spectrum under consideration and have expressed an interest in providing commercial  XH-services.kHb X[ -ԍ Comments of American Telecasting 4, Wireless Cable Association at 34, Wireless Holdings at 45, Leaco at 5, Pacific Bell Mobile at 12. Several of these commenters would restrict licensee eligibility to some degree.lHH X-ԍ American Telecasting states that eligibility should be limited to "those who already offer service to paying subscribers in the particular area."American Telecasting comments at 6. Leaco would permit rural telephone companies to obtain licenses in some instances without participating in a auction, subject to the rural telephone company paying an amount based on the average price paid for auctioned spectrum. Leaco comments at 59. Pacific Bell Mobile Systems merely requests that the Commission not prohibit use of this band for accommodation of fixed microwave systems that are displaced from the 18501990 MHz band by broadband PCS. Pacific Bell Mobile System comments at 2. Additionally, UTC believes that a Fixed and Mobile allocation for commercial services is appropriate, provided that the needs of private users are satisfied in bands specifically set  X -aside for private users.?m  X-ԍ UTC comments at 911.?  X -  X -x/48. In this instance, we find that an allocation for Fixed and Mobile services is not only permissible under the Communications Act, but will also serve the public interest, regardless of whether the ultimate use of the spectrum is for private or commercial services. We believe that such an allocation will ensure that the spectrum is used for services that are most highly valued by the licensees and/or their customers. While we expressed our belief in  Xb-the Notice that services provided under such an approach would most likely meet the statutory criteria for auctions and that such an allocation would be economically beneficial to users and provide operators with incentives to develop and introduce innovative service  X-features and technologies,Rn X$-ԍ NPRM, 9 FCC Rcd. at 6780, para. 9.R the benefits of this type of allocation extend beyond those services offered by commercial, subscriber based providers. If potential licensees indicate that the principal use of this spectrum will not involve receipt by the licensee of compensation from subscribers, thus making this spectrum not subject to auction, we maintain"nn0*((" that the underlying principles would continue to support an allocation to Fixed and Mobile services. Such an allocation thus will enable the greatest variety of services to be developed and used by the public.  X-x049. Many commenters contend that the Commission may not allocate spectrum to both Fixed and Mobile services and use competitive bidding to assign licenses in that allocation because such action would violate the provisions of Section 309(j) of the  X_-Communications Act.o_ X-ԍ See Comments of APCO at 23, AAR at 7, FIT at 3, TIA at 36, UTC at 78, Motorola at 1517, and Winforum at 8. We disagree with commenters who suggest that the Commission has allocated spectrum to Fixed and Mobile services based on the impermissible purpose of  X1-raising funds for the United States Treasury through auctions.p1b XD -ԍ Comments of API at 13, APCO at 6, TIA at 4, UTC at 7, WinForum at 7, Compaq at 13, MSTV at 11, and Motorola at 1517. 47 U.S.C.  309(j)(7)(A). We also disagree with  X -commenters' arguments that our proposal to use competitive bidding in the NPRM alters spectrum allocation criteria and procedures established by the other provisions of the  X -Communications Act.Fq  X-ԍ 47 U.S.C.  309(j)(6)(A).F Further, as explained supra, the Commission is afforded broad discretion in allocating spectrum in the public interest from Section 303 and other provisions of the Act. In this proceeding, we have decided to adopt an allocation to the Fixed and Mobile services. As we previously discussed, there is precedent for the Commission to employ an allocation to more than one service and provide a licensee great latitude as to how  Xy-that spectrum is used, even before the Commission had auction authority.ry X-ԍ See para. 45 supra. discussing allocation of spectrum for GPMS and for PCS. Since both the statute and precedent provide adequate support to allocate frequency bands to both Fixed and Mobile services, we are able to conclude that we have not "alter[ed] spectrum allocation criteria and procedures established by the other provisions of [the] Act . . . ." The Commission's adoption of an allocation to the Fixed and Mobile Services is unrelated to our proposal to auction this allocation.  X-x150. While we are proposing below to use auctions as an assignment mechanism based on our preliminary conclusion, based on the record, that services will likely meet the necessary criteria, we have also requested comment as to other services that might be  X-provided under a Fixed and Mobile allocation.Js^  X#-ԍ See para. 66, infra.J If we determine that it is not reasonably likely that the principal use of this spectrum would meet the criteria for assigning licenses through auctions, or that it would better serve the public interest to provide some or all of this spectrum for nonsubscriberbased Fixed and Mobile, including private services, it will be necessary to use an alternate assignment method."7 s0*(("Ԍ X-ԙx251. Traditional license assignment methods used to award licenses in mutually  X-exclusive situations included random lotteries and comparative hearings. The Commission's authority to use random selection was generally limited by the Budget Act to situations where the Commission has determined that the principal use of the spectrum does not involve  X-providing service to subscribers.Ct X-ԍ 47 U.S.C.  309(i)(1).C Therefore, if the Commission determines that the principal use of the spectrum is reasonably likely to involve service to subscribers, the Commission may assign licenses in mutually exclusive situations by using competitive bidding or comparative hearings. If the Commission determines that the principal use of the spectrum is not reasonably likely to involve service to subscribers, then we may assign licenses in mutually exclusive situations using previously established methods of random selection or  X -comparative hearing.Xuv y XD -ԍ The Commission will also need to determine the criteria for mutually exclusive applications. For instance, licenses may be mutually exclusive if accepted during a previously established "window" of time. Alternatively, we could accept applications on a firstcome, firstserved basis and only applications received on the same day would be considered mutually exclusive. In the case of many private services, we have established frequency  X-coordination requirements to assist in the assignment process. See 47 C.F.R.  90.175.X  X -x352. Some commenters claim that our proposal is inconsistent with our stated objective of providing competition in the provision of new services because different licensees could  X -provide different services and would not, therefore, be in direct competition.Ev  X&-ԍ InFlight comments at 810.E Other commenters argue against our proposal, claiming that customers must be ensured of a variety of services, and that the only way to ensure such variety is for the Commission to prescribe  Xy-what services will be provided in each frequency band.Bwyh  X-ԍ Comments of ITA at 56.B We believe that our proposal for a Fixed and Mobile allocation would provide for a variety of services and would result in competition. Given the wide variety of voice, data, and video services that have been or are now being developed, we believe that licensees will offer various services most demanded by consumers depending on the demographics of a specific area, technical restrictions on use of a specific band, and on existing services currently provided in an area. Licensees under such an allocation plan can be far more responsive to changing consumer demands than can the Commission. Offering licensees the opportunity to offer a wider variety of services, and to modify the types of services offered in response to changing customer demands, results in competition to provide the services most demanded by customers at prices that are deemed reasonable by the marketplace. This results in a much broader form of competition than just direct price competition for a strictly prescribed set of services. "e w0*(("Ԍ X-x453. Regarding specific uses proposed by commenters, we are not persuaded by arguments that we have not sufficiently provided for accommodation of fixed microwave systems that will be displaced by PCS. This topic was the focus of much consideration in our proceeding identifying spectrum for emerging technologies and commenters have provided no substantive support to demonstrate that sufficient spectrum for relocation has not been identified. Further, reaccommodation of these fixed microwave systems requires paired channels. At this time, there is no other spectrum available that we could pair with 46604685 MHz. Several parties seek use of this spectrum for Broadcast Auxiliary services. While these commenters state that this spectrum is needed to support advanced television and to relieve congestion in the 19902110 MHz band, it also is possible that these entities could implement more spectrum efficient operations in the spectrum currently available for Broadcast Auxiliary. Moreover, we note that Broadcast Auxiliary services are permissible  X -under a Fixed and Mobile allocation9x  Xe -ԍ See Table of Frequency Allocations, 47 C.F.R.  2.106. A specific example is the entry for 19902110 MHz which is allocated for Fixed and Mobile use and is currently used for provision of Broadcast Auxiliary services, particularly for electronic news gathering.9 and are not, therefore precluded from obtaining licenses under the allocation we have adopted for this band. Commenters have also suggested that this band be used to accommodate MSS feeder links. The issue of identifying and evaluating the viability of frequency bands for use by MSS feeder links is under consideration  X-in our proceeding preparing for WRC95, IC Docket No. 9431.yK X-ԍ Preparation for International Union World Radiocommunication Conferences, Second  Xu-Notice of Inquiry, IC Docket No. 9431, FCC No. 9536, released January 31, 1995. We also note that the 25 megahertz of spectrum under consideration would not be sufficient, by itself, to satisfy the feeder link spectrum requirements for any of the MSS systems currently being proposed by potential MSS providers. Accordingly, we decline to adopt a specific allocation for this spectrum.  X-x554. A number of entities support a Fixed and Mobile allocation for this band, expressing their desire to use the spectrum for such consumer oriented applications as  X-interactive video, voice, and data.rz Xn-ԍ See comments of Leaco, WCA, Wireless Holdings, and American Telecasting.r Adoption of a Fixed and Mobile allocation for this band will allow licensees to provide a wide variety of applications based on public demand in any particular geographic area. While we anticipate that, under this Fixed and Mobile allocation, most applications provided will be commercial in nature, this allocation does not preclude use of the band for nonsubscriber services and we will continue to develop the record in this proceeding to determine whether or not it is likely that the principal use of this spectrum will be for services that meet the statutory criteria for auctions. Considering the potential for providing a variety of applications in this band, we conclude that the allocation we are adopting in this Order will provide the greatest benefit to the public through the introduction of new applications and the enhancement of existing services." z0*((["  X- NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULE MAKING  X- 23902400 MHz  X-x655. Because we already have rules in place governing unlicensed PCS it is not  X-necessary for us to seek additional comment on service rules.J{ X-ԍ See para. 23, supra.J There are, however, several issues with respect to use of this band that we do seek comment on. We note that the existing service rules effectively preclude operations that would combine 23902400 MHz with the adjacent 24002483.5 MHz band for use as a single, large Part 15 band. We request specific comment on whether some allowance should be made to accommodate operations that combine use of these bands. Commenters pursing combined use of these bands should provide recommendations on appropriate technical standards.  X -x756. The National Research Council (NRC) and Cornell University have requested that aeronautical use of 23902400 MHz be specifically prohibited in order to protect space research operations that are conducted at 2380 MHz. In addition, NRC requests that terrestrial use of 23902400 MHz be prohibited within 100 miles of the National Astronomy and Ionospheric Center (NAIC) at Arecibo, Puerto Rico. We are sensitive to the need to protect important space research operations at 2380 MHz. We agree with regard to aeronautical use, and therefore we propose to specifically prohibit aeronautical use of unlicensed PCS devices operating at 23902400 MHz. However, the potentially nomadic nature of unlicensed PCS devices makes it difficult to effectively prevent use of these devices within a given distance of a particular site. We also believe that the relatively low power of these devices should provide sufficient protection to space research operations in all but the most unusual circumstances. Accordingly, we are not proposing to restrict use of unlicensed PCS devices in the vicinity of the NAIC. We request comment on whether our proposal provides reasonable protection to space research operations and, if not, what steps should be taken to provide greater protection.  Xe-x857. Finally, as we stated above, we believe that unlicensed PCS and Amateur service use of 23902400 MHz will generally be compatible and that it is unnecessary to propose any  X7-formal standards for sharing between these services in this band.J|7y Xa -ԍ See para. 17, supra.J We request comment on whether this is appropriate or whether there is a need to restrict certain uses by either the Amateur service or unlicensed PCS devices that might be particularly disruptive, or whether we should seek to implement for coordination of Amateur/PCS use. Commenters addressing this issue should be specific as to what uses might be particularly disruptive and as to how shared use of the band could be enhanced. ""*|0*((!"Ԍ X- 24022417 MHz   X-x958. Both the Amateur service and Part 15 devices operating at 24022417 MHz continue to be governed in accordance with current applicable technical and operational  X-rules.u} X-ԍ UTC comments at 15, Motorola comments at 1014, Metricom comments at 1314.u However, we seek comment on whether any changes should be made to our rules to facilitate use of this band by the Amateur service and Part 15 devices. Several commenters suggest increasing the status of Part 15 devices and one commenter, UTC, proposes that a Part 16 be created.  X1-x:59. We note that NRC requests that, in order to protect space research operations, aeronautical use of 24022417MHz be prohibited and that terrestrial use of devices at 2402 X -2417 MHz be prohibited within 30 miles of the NAIC.<~ y X--ԍ NRC comments at 7.< Also, NRC expresses concern that harmonic emissions from 24122418 MHz may interfere with radio astronomy use of the  X -48254835 MHz band.F * X-ԍ NRC comments at footnote 10.F While we are currently maintaining the existing use of this band, we request comment on whether any of these restrictions should be implemented. Commenters addressing this issue should provide full support for their positions, including what effect such restrictions will have on the ability of Part 15 devices and the Amateur service to use this band.   X4- 46604685 MHz   X-x A. Service Rules  X-x` ` 1. General Wireless Communications Service  X-x;60. We propose to create a new service for licensing of the 46604685 MHz band. This new service, which would be included in a new Part of the Commission's Rules, would allow a licensee to provide any Fixed or Mobile service, consistent with the allocation for this band and our proposed rules described below. We propose to name this new service the General Wireless Communications Service (GWCS). We believe that this proposal will provide licensees a sufficient opportunity to meet the spectrum needs of consumers. For example, licensees could use this spectrum for dispatch service, pointtopoint microwave, aeronautical audio/visual service, wireless local loop services, and terrestrial fixed and mobile auxiliary broadcast operations. As we have noted, Broadcast services, Radiolocation services,"0*((<" and Satellite services (including the Mobile Satellite Service) would not be included in the  X-General Wireless Communications Services category.J Xb-ԍ See para. 46, supra.J We seek comment on this proposal.  X-x<61. We note that in addition to the Fixed and Mobile allocation we have adopted in the First Report and Order, 46604685 MHz is allocated on coprimary basis for non X-government fixedsatellite service (FSS) spacetoEarth links with use limited to international intercontinental systems and subject to a casebycase electromagnetic analysis in accordance  X_-with US footnote 245 of the Table of Frequency Allocations. In the NOI in this proceeding we requested comment on the necessity of maintaining the US245 restrictions on FSS use of  X1-this band, considering that it would no longer be available for Federal Government use.N1y X[ -ԍ NOI, 9 FCC Rcd at 2177, n. 23.N We received no comments addressing this issue. To facilitate the shared use of this band, we propose to maintain the restrictions set forth in US footnote 245 on use of 46604685 MHz. We request comment on this proposal. Commenters that support eliminating the restriction should fully describe how FSS service use would be compatible with Fixed and Mobile GWCS services .  X-x` ` 2. Designation of Specific Services(#  Xb-x=62. Although we are proposing to establish a new service classification for the intended purpose of enhancing the ability of service providers to meet a variety of user needs, we also acknowledge the possibility of better accommodating these needs by prescribing rules that provide for utilization of the 46604685 MHz frequency band only by specific services. We seek comment on such an alternative approach.  X-x>63. Interested parties who oppose our proposed establishment of a GWCS category should suggest various ways in which use of the 46604685 band could be limited to specific services. For example, we seek comment on (1) what services should be treated as eligible, in connection with our assignment of channels in the band; (2) whether we should divide channels in the band in a manner which assigns Fixed services exclusively to certain channels and Mobile services exclusively to remaining channels in the band; (3) whether we should establish priorities for Fixed service or Mobile service use of some or all of the channels established in the band; and (4) whether we should assign some or all channels established in the band for exclusive use by private Fixed or Mobile Services. Proponents of this alternative approach for designating services in the 46604685 MHz frequency band should provide facts and arguments supporting their view that such an approach will better serve the Commission's objectives and the public interest than would the establishment of a General Wireless Communications Service that would permit use for these and additional applications. "!*0*(( "Ԍ X- xB. Use of Spectrum  X-x?64. As discussed above, we believe that our proposed General Wireless Communication Service will benefit the public by providing licensees the opportunity to use the spectrum as they find appropriate. We tentatively conclude that it is likely that these uses will principally involve the provision of subscriberbased services, thus enabling us to propose  Xv-competitive bidding as the assignment method for this spectrum.Ov X-ԍ See paras. 6869, infra.O Section 309(j)(2)(A) of the Communications Act provides that competitive bidding may be used by the Commission to assign spectrum if the "principal use" of the spectrum involves, or is reasonably likely to involve, the transmission or reception of communications signals to subscribers for  X -compensation.! y XD -ԍ See 47 U.S.C.  309(j)(2)(A). See also Implementation of Section 309(j) of the  X--Communications Act Competitive Bidding, Second Report and Order, PP Docket No. 93 X-253, 9 FCC Rcd 2348, 2353 para. 30, (1994) (Competitive Bidding Second Report and  X-Order), recon ., Second Memorandum Opinion and Order, 9 FCC Rcd 7245 (1994)  X-(Competitive Bidding Reconsideration Order).! In the Competitive Bidding Second Report and Order, we established a general framework for evaluating whether particular service classifications can be considered to be used principally for the provision of subscriberbased services, and we seek comment regarding whether that general framework should be used with regard to the assignment of  X -spectrum in the 46604685 MHz band.  X=-ԍ See Competitive Bidding Second Report and Order, 9 FCC Rcd at 235354, paras. 3036.  X-x@65. In the Competitive Bidding Second Report and Order, we concluded that we will determine principal use by comparing the amount of nonsubscription use made by the licensees in a service as a class with the amount of subscriberbased use "on the basis of  XK-information throughput, time, or spectrum."_Kh  Xd-ԍ Id. at 2354, para. 32. Given the fact that "there is no way to anticipate . . . all of the possible uses of the electromagnetic spectrum", we explicitly retained the ability to use any of  X6-these measurement criteria in evaluating particular service classifications. Id. at n.21._ We found that the competitive bidding assignment method is permissible if "at least a majority of the use of a Commission regulated  X-service or class of service [is] for service to subscribers for compensation."F  X"-ԍ Id. at 2354, para. 32.F In arriving at this approach, we rejected the notion that we must examine individual applications to determine each licensee's intended use of the spectrum.  X-xA66. Given the record before us, we believe that it is reasonable to conclude that the principal use of this spectrum under our proposed General Wireless Communications Service" 0*((p" will involve or is reasonably likely to involve the receipt by the licensee of compensation from subscribers in return for enabling those subscribers to receive or transmit communications signals. As we have described, a number of commenters state that they seek use of this spectrum for such subscriber based services, including for interactive wireless  X-cable and other wireless data, voice, and interactive services.rv X-ԍ See para. 40, supra. In addition it is unclear at this time whether AAVS, which In X-Flight, in its January 24, 1995, Ex Parte filing, states can be provided at 46604685 MHz,  X-would be considered a subscriber based service. In its Ex Parte filing, InFlight merely states  X-that "it is likely that AAVS will be largely advertiser supported." InFlight Ex Parte filing at footnote 2. This appears to suggest that there will be at least some subscriber support for this service.r A number of commenters, however, propose uses of this spectrum, such as for private or broadcast auxiliary services, that would not be subscriberbased. Accordingly, while we believe that it is reasonably likely that the principal use of this spectrum under our proposed General Wireless Communications Service will be for subscriber based services, we request further comment on this tentative conclusion. Commenters addressing this issue should fully describe the service that they contemplate for the spectrum, whether the service would be Fixed or Mobile, and whether it would be private (for a licensee's internal use), commercial (subscriberbased), or noncommon carriage but subscriberbased.  X -xB67. To help us make an accurate determination regarding the extent to which this spectrum will be used for subscriberbased services, we request that commenters describe their spectrum needs and provide an indication of the degree of competition expected within a particular geographic service area. Commenters should also describe as accurately as  Xb-possible the types of geographic areas in which they anticipate operating in (e.g., rural, urban, top 50 markets), since the likelihood of subscriber use may vary among geographic areas.  X-x C. Assignment Methods  X-x 1.` ` Competitive Bidding  X-xC68. Sections 309(j)(1) and 309(j)(2) of the Communications ActR Xx-ԍ 47 U.S.C.  309(j)(1), 309(j)(2).R permits auctions where mutually exclusive applications for initial licenses or construction permits are accepted for filing by the Commission and where the principal use of the spectrum will involve or is reasonably likely to involve the receipt by the licensee of compensation from subscribers in  Xe-return for enabling those subscribers to receive or transmit communications signals. e X$-ԍ For a discussion of our preliminary assumptions regarding the principal use of this  X%-spectrum, see paras. 6467, supra. As we stated in the preceding section, we believe that the principal use of this spectrum will meet"N!Q 0*(("  X-these requirements.J Xy-ԍ See para. 66, supra.J In addition, Section 309(j)(2)(B) requires the Commission, before it may adopt the use of auctions to award licenses, to determine that use of competitive bidding will promote the objectives described in Sections 1 and 309(j)(3) of the Communications Act. We tentatively conclude that the use of competitive bidding to assign licenses in the 46604685 MHz band will promote these objectives. We believe that auctioning licenses in this band will lead to more speedy initiation of services than would use of comparative hearings, and that auctions will place licenses in the hands of those who value the spectrum most highly. Thus, competitive bidding will promote the availability, to all the people of the United States, of a rapid, efficient, nationwide, and worldwide telecommunications system with adequate facilities at reasonable charges, satisfying the objectives of Section 1 of the Communications Act.  X -xD69. Section 309(j)(3) of the Communications Act sets forth Congress's four objectives  X -for competitive bidding, as follows:L y X-ԍ See 47 C.F.R  309(j)(3).L Xx(A) the development and rapid deployment of new technologies, products, and services for the benefit of the public, including those residing in rural areas, without administrative or judicial delays; (# Xx(B) promoting economic opportunity and competition and ensuring that new and innovative technologies are readily accessible to the American people by avoiding excessive concentration of licenses and by disseminating licenses among a wide variety of applicants, including small businesses, rural telephone companies, and businesses owned by members of minority groups and women;(# Xx(C) recovery for the public of a portion of the value of the public spectrum made available for commercial use and avoidance of unjust enrichment through the methods employed to award uses of that resource; and(# Xx(D) efficient and intensive use of the electromagnetic spectrum.(# We tentatively conclude that using a system of competitive bidding for assignments in the 46604685 MHz band will promote these four objectives. First, our experience with the auction program being used to award licenses to provide both narrowband and broadband PCS leads us to believe that auctions will, more quickly than other licensing schemes, lead to the development and rapid deployment of new technologies, products and services, thus satisfying the objective expressed in Section 309(j)(3)(A). Second, we believe that, with the benefit of the comments solicited below with respect to the treatment of "designated entities," we will be able to adopt competitive bidding rules that will advance the objectives of Section"""*0*((!" 309(j)(3)(B) relating to the promotion of economic opportunity and the dissemination of licenses among a wide variety of applicants. Third, use of auctions to assign 46604685 MHz band licenses will clearly advance the goals of Section 309(j)(3)(C) by enabling us to recover for the public a portion of the value of the public spectrum and avoid problems of unjust  X-enrichment. X-ԍ See also para. 98, infra (proposed regulatory safeguards to prevent unjust enrichment). Finally, as we stated in the Competitive Bidding Second Report and Order, auctions tend "to reinforce the desire of licensees to make efficient and intensive use of . . . spectrum. Auctions make explicit what others are willing to pay to use the spectrum, and the licensees' need to recoup the outofpocket expenditure for a license should provide additional  XH-motivation to get the most value out of the spectrum."vHy Xr -ԍ Competitive Bidding Second Report and Order, 9 FCC Rcd 2358, para. 58.v As noted above, we anticipate that any system of competitive bidding we adopt would be designed to lead to the assignment of licenses to those parties who value the licenses most highly and who thus can be expected to make efficient and intensive use of the spectrum, as contemplated by Section 309(j)(3)(D). In light of the foregoing, we tentatively conclude that competitive bidding should be used to award licenses in the 46603685 MHz band in the new General Wireless Communications Service if mutually exclusive applications are filed. We request comment regarding this tentative conclusion.  Xy-x 2.` ` Other Assignment Methods  XK-xE70. Although we are proposing the use of a system of competitive bidding to assign licenses for the General Wireless Communications Service in the 46604685 MHz band, we  X-also seek comment regarding whether we should utilize a different assignment method.v* X-ԍ See, e.g., 47 C.F.R.  1.972, 1.973, 22.131(c)(1). v  V-x` ` a. Spectrum Principally Used for SubscriberBased Services  X-xF71. If the principal use of spectrum in the band is reasonably likely to involve subscriberbased services, then we have the discretion to use a system of competitive bidding to assign licenses in the band if we determine that auctions will promote the objectives  X|-delineated in the Communications Act.V| X!-ԍ See 47 U.S.C.  151, 309(j)(3).V If we determine, in a case in which the principal use of spectrum in the band is reasonably likely to involve subscriberbased services, that those objectives would not be promoted by the use of a system of competitive bidding, then our only alternative is to use comparative hearings as a means of assigning all licenses in the band.  X-xG72. Thus, parties favoring the use of comparative hearings as the method for licensing subscriberbased services should address these issues in their comments. First, commenters"#0*((;" should address the soundness of our tentative conclusion that use of competitive bidding in this instance will promote the objectives established in the Communications Act. Commenters should present arguments, for example, illustrating the manner in which the use of competitive bidding would fail to promote the development and rapid deployment of new technologies and services, would fail to enhance economic opportunity and competition, or would be deficient in promoting efficient and intensive use of the public spectrum. In addition, commenters may present arguments regarding comparative hearings as a mechanism  X_-for ensuring the rapid deployment of new technologies and servicesP_ X-ԍ See 47 U.S.C.  309(j)(3)(A).P and for recovering "for the public . . . a portion of the value of the public spectrum resource made available for  X1-commercial use . . . ."P1y X[ -ԍ See 47 U.S.C.  309(j)(3)(C).P If such comments lead us to conclude that our tentative conclusions regarding the extent to which competitive bidding promotes the objectives of the Act are not sound, then we will prescribe comparative hearings as the method for assigning licenses in the 46604685 MHz band. However, our tentative decision to use a system of competitive bidding to assign licenses in the 46604685 MHz band reflects our view that comparative hearings would not be an effective method for this purpose, in part because our "experience  X -with comparative hearings has shown they usually are prolonged." * X-ԍ Amendment of the Commission's Rules to Establish Rules and Policies Pertaining to  Xk-a Mobile Satellite Service in the 16101626.5/2483.52500 MHz Frequency Bands, Notice of  XT-Proposed Rulemaking, CC Docket No. 92166, 9 FCC Rcd 1094, 1114, para. 40 (1994) (MSS  X=-Notice). Further, "[a]s a general matter . . . we are reluctant to substitute our judgment for the wisdom of the marketplace by dictating outcomes based on assessment of the relative merits of applicants' service  Xb-proposals."b X-ԍ Amendment of the Commission's Rules to Establish Rules and Policies Pertaining to  X-a Mobile Satellite Service in the 16101626.5/2483.52500 MHz Frequency Bands, Report and  X{-Order, CC Docket No. 92166, FCC 94261, at para. 66, released Oct. 14, 1994 (MSS Report  Xd-and Order). We seek comment on these tentative views.  V4-x` ` b. Spectrum Not Principally Used for SubscriberBased Services  X-xH73. The Communications Act provides that the Commission has the discretion to use a system of random selection to grant licenses involving a use of the spectrum in cases of mutually exclusive applications if the Commission has determined that the principal use of the  X-spectrum will not involve subscriberbased services.J  Xt%-ԍ See 47 U.S.C.  309(i).J Alternatively, the Commission could employ comparative hearings to grant licenses in such cases. "$0*((Q"Ԍ X-xI74. As indicated in our previous discussion, we have reached the tentative view that, based on the record thus far established in this proceeding, it is reasonable to conclude that the principal use of spectrum in the proposed General Wireless Communications Service will involve or is reasonably likely to involve the receipt by licensees of compensation from subscribers in return for enabling those subscribers to receive or transmit communications signals. If, however, the pleadings in response to this Notice demonstrate that there is not a reasonable basis for expecting that the principal use of the spectrum will be for subscriberbased services, then we must determine whether to employ lotteries or comparative hearings as the assignment method for licenses in the band.  X -xJ75. We tentatively conclude that, if we determine that the principal use of the proposed General Wireless Communications Service or other service in the 46604685 MHz band will not be for subscriberbased services, then the public interest will be better served through the use of a random selection method to assign licenses in the band. It is our tentative view that a lottery system would be preferable to comparative hearings because it would expedite the grant of licenses and would be capable of resulting in the provision of  X-adequate service to users.b X -ԍ See MSS Notice, 9 FCC Rcd at 1118, para. 46. In assessing the relative merits of lotteries and comparative hearings for granting licenses for public mobile services and certain other services, we have found that a system of random selection is preferable: XxX` ` Although this Commission is always chary of imposing new regulations on the communications industry, we believe in this case that the benefits of the lottery regulations far outweigh their costs. Lotteries will help speed provision of service to the public by eliminating the costly and time consuming comparative hearings while still maintaining some relative advantage for minorities and others underrepresented in the ownership of mass media facilities. The Commission holds great hope for lotteries . . . .x`  X-Amendment of the Commission's Rules to Allow the Selection from Among Certain Competing Applications Using Random Selection or Lotteries Instead of Comparative  X-Hearings, Second Report and Order, 93 FCC 2d 952, 997, para. 131 (1983), recon. denied, 49 Fed. Reg. 49466 (Dec. 20, 1984). If a system of random selection is used to award licenses in the 46604685 frequency band, we propose to implement this system in essentially the same manner as the framework we are proposing in this Notice for a system of competitive  XK-bidding.NK X$-ԍ See paras. 7783, infra.N That is, the rules we propose for channelization and aggregation of frequency blocks, for license areas, and for applicant eligibility in the case of a system of random selection are the same as in the case of auctions. We seek comment on this proposed general"%0*((" framework. We also seek comment on specific procedural rules we might establish for  X-lotteries.v Xb-ԍ See, e.g., 47 C.F.R.  1.8211.825, 1.972, 1.16011.1603.v  X-x3.` ` Mutual Exclusivity  X-xK76. One important aspect of any assignment method is determining whether applications are mutually exclusive. The Communications Act states that "[n]othing in [Section 309(j)], or in the use of competitive bidding, shall . . . be construed to relieve the Commission of the obligation in the public interest to continue to use engineering solutions, negotiation, threshold qualifications, service regulations, and other means in order to avoid  X -mutual exclusivity in application and licensing proceedings . . . ."F y XD -ԍ 47 U.S.C.  309(j)(6)(E).F We propose to use a 30day filing window or other application cutoff method to allow for competing initial  X -applications.X * X-ԍ See, e.g., 47 C.F.R.  22.131. X Because the 46604685 MHz band is currently unlicensed and the Commission has proposed to use defined service areas for each license, we need not be concerned at this time about situations where an application to modify a station authorization is mutually exclusive with an initial license application. We seek comment on this proposal, particularly whether some other type of filing group would be more appropriate for determining whether initial applications are mutually exclusive. For example, with private services, in particular, the Commission has often attempted to reduce the possibility of mutual  XK-exclusivity between initial applicants by adopting "first come, first served" proceduresVK X-ԍ See, e.g., 47 C.F.R.  1.953.V and  X4-utilizing frequency coordinators.W4 Xq-ԍ See, e.g., 47 C.F.R.  90.175.W  X-x D. Channelization; Aggregation  X-  X-xL77. We propose that the 46604685 MHz band be licensed in five blocks, each of which would be 5 megahertz wide. Many of the subscriber based uses discussed by commenters for this band, such as interactive video, voice, and data, as well as nonsubscriber based uses such as auxiliary broadcast or private services, require relatively wide bandwidth. In order to provide licensees as much opportunity as possible to obtain the amount of spectrum they need to offer their particular service, we propose to permit licensees to obtain multiple 5 megahertz blocks. Based on available information about the likely services to be provided in this band, we tentatively conclude that no licensee would need more than 15 megahertz in a single market area. Therefore, we propose to limit a single entity from obtaining more than three of these blocks in a single geographic licensing area. We request" &= 0*((" comment on this proposal and whether an alternative channelization plan might be more beneficial. Commenters should provide the specifics of any alternative channelization plan if they believe an alternative plan is appropriate and should provide full support for their views. In particular, interested parties who have advocated particular applications for the 46604685 MHz frequency band, in earlier comment rounds in this proceeding, are invited to present facts and arguments supporting channelization plans that may be more conducive to the service applications they favor.  XH-xM78. We also propose that, regardless of the specific service to be provided, this spectrum will not count against the 45 MHz spectrum cap that applies to certain commercial  X -mobile radio service (CMRS) licensees.  X -ԍ Implementation of Section 3(n) and 332 of the Communications Act Regulatory  X| -Treatment of Mobile Services, Third Report and Order, GN Docket No. 93252, 9 FCC Rcd  Xe -7988, 810910, para. 263 (1994), recon. pending (The spectrum cap currently applies to personal communications services, specialized mobile radio services, and cellular services.). We propose this for two reasons. First, this band is at a substantially higher frequency than any currently available mobile radio system. As a result, it is unlikely that offtheshelf equipment to provide services competitive with CMRS services will be available for use in this band within the next few years. Second, unlike all other allocations for twoway CMRS services, this allocation is for a single, unpaired frequency band. Although it may be possible in the future to provide a CMRS service that is competitive with existing or planned CMRS services on unpaired spectrum, we do not believe that this will be feasible in the near future. Consequently, until it is feasible to offer services competitive with existing and planned CMRS services on this new band, we believe it would be premature to include spectrum assignments in this band toward the spectrum cap adopted in the CMRS proceeding. We request comment on this proposal.  X-x E. License Area  X-  X-xN79. Under our Fixed and Mobile allocation, we propose that all licenses issued be  X-based on Major Trading Areas (MTA).  4 X-ԍ MTAs are defined in the Rand McNally 1992 Commercial Atlas & Marketing Guide 3639 (123d ed. 1992). There are 47 MTAs, as defined by Rand McNally. Following the approach we have taken with regard to other services in which we have used MTA license areas, we propose to separate Alaska from the Seattle, Washington, MTA so that Alaska would be licensed as a separate MTAlike area. We also propose to license separately the following additional MTAlike areas:  X$-X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:( ( ( T  c  H   Bands Identified for Reallocation H  Reallocation StatusH  Reallocation Schedule c q v Hh  13901400 MHz J h Exclusive J h January 1999q q  hh  14271432 MHz h Exclusive h January 1999*q q J  hh  16701675 MHz, h Mixed, h January 1999**q q   hh  17101755 MHzh Mixedh January 2004q q ,  hh  23002310 MHzh Exclusiveh January 1996q q@ @ P hh  23902400 MHzh Exclusiveh Immediateq@ @ Pq@ @ P hh  24022417 MHzh Exclusiveh Immediateq@ @ Pq  hh  36503700 MHzah Mixedah January 1999q q  hh  46354660 MHzh Exclusiveh January 1997*q B B Ra h  46604685 MHzs Exclusives ImmediateB B R c * Protection for a limited number of facilities would be required for an additional period of time. ** Limited immediate use of this spectrum would be considered. ">0*0*0*6"  X-) APPENDIX B ĐTP  X- Comments Filed in Response to the NPRM in ET Docket No. 9432   I. 1. A a.(1)(a) i) a) 1. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1. 3Com Corporation (3Com) 2. A. Frank Adamson, Ph.D. 3. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. (AMD) 4. Alcatel Network Systems, Inc. (Alcatel) 5. Amateur Television Network 6. American Radio Relay League, Incorporated (ARRL) 7. American Petroleum Institue (API) 8. American Telecasting, Inc. (ATI) 9. American West Airlines (AWI)  10. Andrew Corporation (Andrew)  11. Apple Computer, Inc. (Apple)  12. Association of PublicSafety Communications Officials International (APCO)  13. Association for Maximum Service Television, Inc and Other Major Television Broadcast xEntities (MSTV)  14. Association of American Railroads (AAR) 15. AT&T Corp. (AT&T) 16. AvantGarde Telecommunications, Inc. (AGT) 17. Bell Atlantic 18. Brian Robinson 19. Capital Cities/ABC, Inc. (ABC) 20. Cincinnati Microwave, Incorporated (CMI) 21. Claircom Communications Group, L.P. (Claircom) 22. Compaq Computer Corporation (Compaq) 23. Comsumer Electronics Group of the Electronics Industry Association (EIA) 24. Continental Airlines (Continental) 25. Cornell University 26. County of Los Angeles (L.A. County) 27. Cylink Corporation (Cylink) 28. David R. Couch 29. Digital Ocean, Inc. 30. Forest Industries Telecommunications (FIT) 31. Fusion Systems Corporation (FSC) 32. Fusion Lighting, Inc. (FLI)  33. Home Box Office (HBO) !34. IEEE 802, the LAN MAN Standads Committee (IEEE) "35. InFlight Phone Corporation (InFlight) #36. Industrial Telecommunications Association, Inc. (ITA) $37. International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) %38. International Microwave Power Institute &39. L. Stephen Bell '40. Leaco Rural Telephone Cooperative, Inc. (Leaco) (41. Loral/Qualcomm Partnership, L.P. (LQP)"(?0*0*0*'6"Ԍ)42. Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department (LA Sheriff)  X-*43. Manufacturers Radio Frequency Advisory Committee, Inc. (MRFAC) +44. Metricom, Inc. (Metricom) ,45. Microsoft Corporation (Microsoft) -46. Mike Cheponis .47. Motorola, Inc. (Motorola) /48. National Research Council (NRC) 049. Norand Corporation (Norand) 150. Northern California Packet Association (NCPA) 251. Northern Amateur Relay Council of California, Inc. (NARCC) 352. NYNEX Telephone Companies (NYNEX) 453. Organization for the Protection and Advancement of Small 554. Telephone Companies (OPASTCO) 655. Pacific Bell Mobile 756. Part 15 Coalition 857. Palomar Amateur Radio Club, Inc. (PARC) 958. Pegasus Communications Inc. (Pegasus) :59. Personal Communciations Industry Association (PCIA) ;60. Radio Amateur Satellite Corporation <61. Robert S. Bennett, PH.D. =62. Rochester Telephone Corporation (Rochestertel) >63. Rockwell International Corporation (Rockwell) ?64. San Bernardino Microwave Society (SBMS) @65. Software Publishers Association  X-A66. Southern California Repeater and Remote Base Association   (SCRRBA) B67. Southwestern Bell Telephone Company (SWB) C68. SR Telecom Inc. (SRT) D69. Standard Microsystems Corporation (SMC) E70. Symbol Technologies, Inc. (Symbol) F71. Tadiran Telecommunications LTD (Tadiran) G72. TDS Telecommunications Corp. H73. Telecommunicaions Industry Association (TIA) I74. Tetherless Access Ltd. (TAL) J75. United States Telephone Association (USTA) K76. US West Communications (US West) L77. UTC M78. Western Multiplex Corporation (Western Multiplex) N79. Western States VHFMicrowave Society (Western States) O80. William A. Burns P81. Windata, Inc. (Windata) Q82. Wireless Holdings, Inc. (HWI) R83. Wireless Information Networks Forum, Inc. (WINForum) S84. Wireless Cable Association International, Inc. (WCAI) T85. Xircom, Inc. (Xircom) "(@0*0*0*'6"Ԍ X-X  Late Filed Comments in Response to NPRM ĐTP U86. Federal Highway Administration V87. Larus Corporation W88. New York University X89. Solectek Corporation Y90. University of Arizonia "_A0*0*0*'6"  X-) APPENDIX C ĐTP  X-  Reply Comments Filed in ET Docket 9432 ă  1. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)Z 1. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. 2. Alarm Industry Communications Committee 3. Alcatel Network Systems, Inc. 4. Amateur Radio Council of Arizona 5. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics 6. American Mobile Satellite Corporation 7. American Petroleum Institute 8. American Radio Relay League, Incorporated 9. American Telecasting, Inc.  10. Andrew Corporation  11. Apple Computer, Inc.  12. Association of American Railroads  13. AT&T Corp.  14. Claircom Communications Group, L.P. 15. Compaq Computer Corporation 16. Comsat Corporation 17. Cox Enterprises, Inc. and Comcast Corporation 18. Cylink Corporation 19. ETM Solar Works 20. Frontier Corporation 21. GTE Service Corporation 22. InFlight Phone Corporation 23. Industrial Telecommunications Association, Inc. 24. Interdigital Communications Corporation 25. International Business Machines Corporation 26. International Space Power Program 27. James S. Kaplan 28. Metricom, Inc. 29. Micron Communications, Inc. 30. Mike Cheponis 31. Motorola, Inc. 32. National Telephone Cooperative Association  33. National Assoc. of Broadcasters & the Assoc. for Max. Service TV !34. Northern Amateur Relay Council of California, Inc "35. Part 15 Coalition #36. Personal Communications Industry Association $37. Radio Amateur Satellite Corporation %38. San Bernardino Microwave Society &39. Society of Broadcast Engineers, Inc. '40. Southern California Repeater and Remote Base Association (41. Southwestern Bell Telephone Company )42. Space Studies Institute"(B0*0*0*'6"Ԍ*43. SR Telecom Inc. +44. SUNSAT Energy Council ,45. Symbol Technologies, Inc. -46. Tetherless Access LTD. .47. Texas A&M University /48. United States Telephone Association 049. UTC 150. William A. Burns  X1-@ Late filed Reply Comments ă 251. Amateur Television Network 352. Proxim, Inc. " C0*0*0*m 6"  X-) APPENDIX D ă  X-  FINAL REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ANALYSIS ă  Xv- x1. Need and purpose of this action: This Report and Order allocates 50 megahertz of spectrum that was transferred from Federal Government to private sector use. Transfer and allocation of this spectrum was required by the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993.  X -x 2. Summary of the issues raised by the public comments in response to the Initial  X -Regulatory Flexibility Analysis: There were no comments submitted in response to the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.  X -x 3. Significant alternatives considered: Commenters in this proceeding supported allocating the spectrum under consideration for a number of various services. These services include wireless local loops, a groundtoair aeronautical audio/video service, mobile satellite service, private services, unlicensed PCS devices, other unlicensed devices, amateur service, interactive data, audio and video services, fixed service, mobile services, and broadcast auxiliary services. This Report and Order considers all of these uses and provides analysis regarding each. As a result of this analysis, the Commission determined that the action taken in this Report and Order would provide the most beneficial use of the spectrum under consideration. "D0*0*0*76"  X-* APPENDIX E ă  X- FURTHER INITIAL REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ANALYSIS ă x  X-x 1. Reason for Action : The proposals for technical rules service rules, and licensing mechanisms proposed herein are for use of spectrum that has been Transferred from Federal Government to private sector use. The Commission adopted allocations for this spectrum on February 7, 1995. Accordingly, these proposals are necessary to provide a structure for nonGovernment entities to use the spectrum.  X -x 2. Objectives: The Commission seeks to provide service, technical rules, and to issue licenses, for use of this spectrum in a manner that provides the greatest potential benefit to the public by providing for the introduction of new services and the enhancement of existing services. These new and enhanced services will create new jobs, foster economic growth, and improve access to communications by industry and the American public.  Xy-x 3. Legal Basis: The legal basis for these rule changes is found in Sections 4(i), 303(g), 303(r), 309(j), 332(a), and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 303(g), 303(r), 309(j), 332(a), and 403 and Section 115(a) of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration Organization Act, 47 U.S.C.  925(a).  X-x 4. Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements: The proposals under consideration in this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking may impose certain reporting and recordkeeping requirements on licensees and others utilizing this spectrum.  X-x 5. Federal Rules Which Overlap, Duplicate or Conflict With These Rules: None.  X|-x 6. Description, Potential Impact, and Number of Small Entities Involved: Many small entities could be positively affected by this proposal because the proposal will provide for the introduction of new, competitive communications and will foster new technologies resulting in new jobs, economic growth, and improved access to communications by industry, including small entities. The full extent of the impact on small entities cannot be predicted until various issues raised in the proceeding have been resolved. After evaluating the comments filed in response to the Notice, the Commission will examine further the impact of all final rules in this proceeding on small entities and set forth its findings in the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.  X"-x 7. Any Significant Alternatives Minimizing the Impact on Small Entities  X#-Consistent with the Stated Objectives: This Second Notice of Proposed Rule Making solicits comments on a variety of alternatives, including as to how our licensing mechanism, service rules, and technical rules can but structured to serve a variety of needs. ":&E0*0*0*$6"  X-* APPENDIX F ă  X-/ Final Rules ă A. Part 15 of Chapter I of Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations are amended as follows:  X_- PART 2 FREQUENCY ALLOCATIONS AND RADIO TREATY MATTERS;  XH-GENERAL RULES AN REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for Part 2 continues to read as follows:  X - AUTHORITY: Sec. 4, 302, 303, and 307 of the Communications Act of 1934, as  X -amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 154, 302, 303 and 307, unless otherwise noted. 2. Section 2.106, the Table of Frequency Allocations, is amended to read as follows: a. In the 23902450 MHz band and the 45004800 MHz band, revise all columns to read as follows:  X-  2.106 Table of Frequency Allocations.  X- * * * * * "F0*0*0*6" 3'3'Standard'3'3Standard Bullet List>G  h  H  #X\  P6G;P# h!ddxv>( ( ( AddxG$'tg h $B B R P $ &Y& " International tablePY"United States tablePY"p(FCC use designators&P 8  & &Y& "F9Region 1allocation h'MHz t t mq(1)"^ Region 2allocation L MHz      (2)"Region 3allocation =MHz IE IE B(3)"W Government "NonGovernment"d'Rule Part(s) ( ( ( ((6)",Specialuse ,frequencies . .  -(7)(8  8 P( &88888     &    "BAllocation MHz (4)" Allocation MHz =! (5)   8   &+88888     &   * * * * * * * p   &+88888     &  23002450 FIXED. MOBILE. Amateur. Radiolocation. 664 751A 752  23002450 FIXED. MOBILE RADIOLOCATION. Amateur. 664 750B 751 751B 752  23002310 RADIOLOCATION. Fixed. Mobile. US253 G2H  23002310 Amateur. US253H   Amateur (97).H  &p  8 & &s33888HH   &  { { 23102360 Mobile. Radiolocation. Fixed. 751B US276 US327 US328 G2 G120 s 23102360 BROADCASTING SATELLITE. Mobile. 751B US276 US327 US328 s s  Digital Audio Radio Services&8 p H & &s33888HH   &    23602390 MOBILE. RADIOLOCATION. Fixed. US276 G2 G120 23602390 MOBILE. US276  &p 3 & &33888HH   &  # # 23902400 G122# 23902400 AMATEUR.# Radio Frequency Devices (15). AMATEUR (97).# &3 3 & V V 24002402 RADIOLOCATION. 664 752 G2V 24002402 Amateur. 664 752V  Amateur (97).V &3 3 #&   24022417 664 752 G122 24022417 AMATEUR. 664 752 AMATEUR (97). Radio Frequency Devices (15). &3 3 V& &33888HH   &  " " 24172450 RADIOLOCATION. 664 752 G2" 24172450 Amateur. 664 752"  Amateur (97)." 3   X"-#o\  PCXP# "#G$$$B'"" '3'3Standard Bullet List'3'3StandardHPLA4POS.PRSo\ >HhGH  h  HH  #X\  P6G;P# | AddxG$'tg addxH$'tg | &3 P & &Y33888HH   & " International tablePY"United States tablePY"p(FCC use designators&P 8  & &Y33888HH   & "F9Region 1allocation h'MHz t t mq(1)"^ Region 2allocation L MHz      (2)"Region 3allocation =MHz IE IE B(3)"W Government "NonGovernment"d'Rule Part(s) ( ( ( ((6)",Specialuse ,frequencies . .  -(7)(8  8 P( &88888     &    "BAllocation MHz (4)" Allocation MHz =! (5)   8   &88888     &   * * * * * * * X  &88888     &  45004800 FIXED. FIXEDSATELLITE (spacetoEarth) 792A. MOBILE.  yO - H H   45004660 FIXED. MOBILE. US245  45004660 FIXEDSATELLITE (spacetoEarth). 792A US245    "X 8 " &sX8888e    &  P 46604685 G1220s 46604685 FIXED. FIXEDSATELLITE (spacetoEarth). MOBILE. 792A US2450s 0s "8 X  " &sX8888e    &   46854800 FIXED. MOBILE. US245 46854800 FIXEDSATELLITE (spacetoEarth). 792A US245  X 0 X-#o\  PCXP# * * * * * * * ",Hxxx>" '3'3StandardHPLA4POS.PRSo\ 3'3'Standard Bullet ListHHI    H  b. The text of footnote G2 is revised and the text of footnote G122 is added to read as follows:  X- Government (G) Footnotes  X- * * * * * G2 In the bands 216225, 420450 (except as provided by US 217), 890902, 928942, 13001400, 23002390, 24002402, 24172450, 27002900, 56505925, and 90009200 MHz, the Government radiolocation is limited to the military services. * * * * * G122 The bands 23902400, 24022417 and 46604685 MHz were identified for immediate reallocation, effective August 10, 1994, for exclusive nonGovernment use under Title VI of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993. Effective August 10, 1994, any Government operations in these bands are on a noninterference basis to authorized nonGovernment operations and shall not hinder the implementation of any nonGovernment operations. * * * * * "I0*0*0*u" B. Part 15 of Chapter I of Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations are amended as follows:  X- 3'3'Standard Bullet List3'3'StandardHPLA4POS.PRSo\ IJ PART 15 RADIO FREQUENCY DEVICES 1. The authority citation for Part 2 continues to read as follows:  X_- AUTHORITY: Sec. 4, 302, 303, 304, and 307 of the Communications Act of 1934, as  XH-amended, 47 U.S.C. sections 154, 302, 303, 304, and 307. 2. The Table of Contents of Part 15, Subpart D, is revised to read as follows: * * * * *  X - Subpart D Unlicensed Personal Communications Services Devices * * * X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8: